Jharkhand HC backs online land mutation applications, says digital filing cannot be restricted
SUMAN K SHRIVASTAVA Ranchi, September 10: The Jharkhand High Court has upheld the insistence of revenue authorities on online land mutation applications,…
SUMAN K SHRIVASTAVA
Ranchi, September 10: The Jharkhand High Court has upheld the insistence of revenue authorities on online land mutation applications, holding that the digitisation of land records is consistent with Section 11 of the Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973.
Justice Ananda Sen, in an order pronounced on September 10, dismissed a challenge by a Jamshedpur resident whose offline mutation application for a plot in Mango had been rejected by the Circle Officer solely because it was not submitted online.
The court, however, also noted the digital divide in rural and backward areas and directed that applicants facing difficulties in online filing could seek assistance through District Legal Services Authorities and Para Legal Volunteers.
Petitioner challenges rejection of offline application
The case concerned a mutation application relating to Khata No. 427, Plot No. 2160, measuring 0.02.40 hectares, at Mango, Ward No. 10, Jamshedpur.
The petitioner, Madan Mohan Prasad, had approached the High Court after the Circle Officer, Golmuri, refused to accept his offline mutation application on the ground that it had not been filed online.
Counsel for the petitioner argued that Section 11 of the 1973 Act requires an application to be submitted in the prescribed form but does not specifically mandate online filing. The petitioner contended that no legislative amendment had been made to exclude offline applications or make digital filing the only permissible mode.
The State defended the online filing requirement, arguing that digitisation would help prevent the issuance of illegal rent receipts, improve accountability and enable better tracking of the creation and cancellation of mutations. The State also informed the court that steps were being taken to amend the statutory provision.
Court says online filing is compatible with Section 11
Justice Ananda Sen examined Section 11, which requires an application to be filed in the prescribed form before the Anchal Adhikari (Circle Officer). The court observed that the provision does not expressly use the words “Online Application”.
However, the court held that the absence of the term “online application” does not mean that digital filing is prohibited.
The court relied on the principle of dynamic and purposive statutory interpretation, observing that laws must be interpreted in the context of technological and societal changes.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Shailesh Dhairyawan v. Mohan Balkrishna Lulla, the court noted that statutory interpretation is not static and that purposive interpretation has an important role where a purely literal interpretation may not serve the purpose of a statute.
Digitisation can improve transparency, reduce delays
The High Court noted that when the 1973 legislation was enacted, digitisation and computerisation were not part of the administrative landscape.
It observed that digitising land records and uploading them on online portals can improve transparency, reduce delays caused by movement of physical files and minimise manipulation of physical records.
The court further held that the statutory requirement to file an application can be fulfilled through an online system where such a facility is available.
It specifically rejected the argument that Section 11 limits applications to the physical mode, observing that the provision can accommodate online applications in the digital era.
High Court flags digital divide
While upholding the online filing requirement, the court acknowledged that access to digital facilities remains uneven, particularly in backward and remote areas.
Justice Sen referred to the digital divide and pointed to facilities such as Suvidha Kendras at Panchayat offices and Pragya Kendras, where people can receive assistance with digital applications.
The court also noted the availability of legal aid facilities, mobile e-Seva vans and Para Legal Volunteers to assist people who may not have access to digital facilities or may be unable to file applications themselves.
Applicant directed to file mutation application online
The High Court concluded that the revenue authorities’ insistence on an online mutation application did not violate Section 11 of the Act and did not amount to an excess of jurisdiction.
It directed the petitioner to fill up the online form immediately. If he faced difficulties, he was asked to approach the District Legal Services Authority through a Para Legal Volunteer for assistance.
The court further directed the concerned authorities to take a decision on the application once it was submitted and communicate the decision to the petitioner.
The writ petition was accordingly disposed of, along with any pending interlocutory applications. The order was pronounced by Justice Ananda Sen on September 10, 2026.
